When you manage, do unto others as they’d have you do unto them

A famous person once said “do unto others as you’d have them do unto you”. That is, treat others like you’d like to be treated.

As a manager, heck as someone who wants to get things done in an organization, that’s the baseline. If you can’t treat other people with respect and empathy, you’re going to have a hard time getting anything done. You might be able to get some stuff done by yourself, or via transactional behavior, or via fear. (By the way, if this is common in your organization, I’d look for new work because this type of motivation is symptomatic of a toxic workplace.) To really build a strong team, you need to, at a minimum, treat others as you’d treat yourself.

However, to be effective as a manager, this isn’t enough. Rather than treating others as you’d like to be treated, you need to learn how others would like to be treated. And then treat them that way.

What does that mean? Well, within the context of a software development team (where I have had direct management experience) you need to figure out what motivates each member of your team and, within the limits of your organizational capacity, give that to them. “Jane” may be motivated by the opportunity to work on the front end, whereas “Biyu” may want to focus on her algorithms. Some team members may want to start new projects, others may want to refine processes and make existing applications work really well.

This motivation changes over time, of course. This introduces additional complexity. When “Bob” joined the team, he might have been motivated by the opportunity to work with new technologies, but a few years in he may be more motivated by really impacting user experience.

The best way to figure out what motivates someone is to ask them. Hence the emphasis on 1:1s in the software business, where the employee controls the agenda. Another good way to decipher motivation is observation. Does “Olaf” spend extra time working on project A but is dragging his feet on project B? If so, why? Is one more UX focused, and the other more algorithmic? Such observations can also be starting points during the 1:1: “you seem to really be enjoying project A. What do you like most about that work?”

If your team or company can’t offer what someone wants, then it may be time for them to move on. The best managers I know were excited when I moved on because I judged it’d make me happier. This isn’t easy for the organization, but if you are playing the long game, the former employee will be an ambassador for you. Whether that is referring business or other employees, the goodwill can benefit the company. Contrast that with a company that holds on to a valuable employee even if they are unhappy (with golden handcuffs or other less savory mechanisms). When the employee finally leaves, there will be no reservoir of goodwill. Even before linkedin and glassdoor, this was no good. Now that folks can look up where people previously worked (and possible employees should do their research), the way you treat folks will be shared.

Overall, the key is to realize that what may excite you, or would excite you if you were an individual team member, or what might have excited you at a particular stage of your career, may not excite a team member. So, rather than put them in your shoes, put yourself in theirs.